Do Canadians Leave No Trace? Understanding Leave No Trace attitudes of frontcountry and backcountry overnight visitors to Canadian provincial parks

Abstract

Both Ontario and Alberta's provincial park systems receive more than 8 million visitors on an annual basis. Park managers must employ direct (e.g., rules and regulations) and indirect (e.g., education and interpretation programs) strategies to minimize negative environmental impacts caused by these visitors. Leave No Trace (LNT) is a widely accepted educational program that aims to reduce environmentally-depreciative behaviours and promote responsible outdoor recreation through low-impact camping practices. The purpose of this study was to understand the level of perceived LNT knowledge of Canadian provincial parks users as well as determine park visitors' attitudes towards LNT practices. Park visitors' knowledge of and attitudes towards LNT practices were measured to determine if there was a difference between (a) those who camped in the backcountry and frontcountry and (b) between those who camped in Alberta and Ontario provincial parks. Results suggest there are in fact statistical and substantive differences between frontcountry and backcountry over-night visitors as well as those who visited parks in Alberta and Ontario. While those who camped in the backcountry had higher self-reported levels of LNT knowledge, those who camped in the frontcountry expressed pro-environment behavioural attitudes that more closely aligned with LNT practices. Additionally, Alberta park visitors reported higher levels of LNT knowledge and consistently demonstrated pro-environment behavioural attitudes more in line with LNT practices than those of park visitors in Ontario. Management implicationsUnderstanding differences between park users’ knowledge and attitudes, will help park managers develop more effective education programs designed to foster pro-environmental behaviours and attitudes with the goal of reducing the negative impacts associated with camping. There has been controversy in recent years related to the appropriateness and effectiveness of LNT, however, this research suggests that park visitors do in fact know what LNT is and hold attitudes largely in line with the principles, therefore suggesting it is still highly relevant. Significant differences in LNT attitudes and knowledge can be observed between users (i.e., backcountry and frontcountry), which may be explained by social demographics; education efforts should target the most common depreciative behaviours (e.g., dogs off leash) and be tailored to context and user group. Finally, this study suggests that perhaps the LNT brand is not enough, but rather consistent and tailored communication from park staff focusing on consequences of inappropriate behaviours and benefits to the park may be more effective at changing knowledge and attitudes than campaigns officially associated with the LNT brand.